Hertz Corporation
11 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (1997–2025)
5 trusted published court opinions analyzed; 4 map to 3 distinct cases · 1 docket-only case without a recorded end date
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Hertz Corporation as an employer in 11 distinct federal employment cases between 1997 and 2025.
Of the 5 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 5 ended in a ruling for the employer.
The most common claims on record were Discrimination, Workers Compensation, and Wrongful Termination.
Cases were filed across 1 state (NY).
These figures summarize publicly available U.S. federal court records only. Most workplace disputes are resolved privately and never appear in litigation. A case outcome reflects many factors and is not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Written decisions across 3 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Hertz Corporation appears in 5 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Asli M. Ali, V. Wa State Department Of Labor & Industries (2023) — Defendant Win. This case involved Asli M. Ali, who had an employment-related dispute with the Washington State Department of Labor & Industries. The Department of Labor & Industries is the state agency responsible for workplace safety, workers' compensation, and employment standards in Washington. Read the ruling.
Sealy v. the HERTZ CORPORATION (2009) — Defendant Win. This case involved an employee named Sealy who filed a discrimination lawsuit against Hertz Corporation, the car rental company. Sealy claimed that Hertz had discriminated against them in violation of employment laws, though the specific details of the alleged discrimination are not provided in the available informatio… Read the ruling.
Hertz Corp. v. NLRB (1997) — Defendant Win. This case involved a dispute between Hertz Corporation and a union that claimed the company discriminated against workers for union activities. The union filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which is the federal agency that enforces workers' rights to organize and join unions. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Discrimination (2 of 5), Workers’ Compensation, Wrongful Termination. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Discrimination, Workers’ Compensation and Wrongful Termination.
Applicable statutes referenced across these rulings include: NLRA (29 U.S.C. §§ 151-169) — The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects the rights of employees to organize, form or join labor unions, bargain collectively through representatives of their choosing, and engage in other concerted activities for mutual aid or protection. See the NLRA reference page for filing deadlines, employee thresholds, and remedies. NLRA.
Published opinions span New York. New York is an EEOC deferral state, which extends the federal Title VII / ADA / ADEA filing deadline from 180 to 300 days. Browse state-specific employment rulings for jurisdictional patterns. New York rulings.
These published opinions sit within the transportation sector, where USERRA, FMLA, and DOT safety-retaliation claims appear alongside standard discrimination claims.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
5 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 1 summary-judgment opinions, 1 ended the case in Hertz Corporation’s favor and 0 let the worker’s claims continue.
What do these stages mean?
- Appeal
- A higher court reviewing an earlier decision. Many published opinions come from this stage, after a lot has already happened in the case.
- Summary judgment
- A ruling where the judge decides the case — or part of it — without a trial, because one side argues the key facts are not in dispute. For workers, getting past this step is often the biggest hurdle.
Published federal-court opinions only — most workplace disputes are resolved privately. This is not anyone’s odds, and not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Facing something similar? Check your rights →
Claim Types
What these numbers mean
A case is one lawsuit, identified by its court and docket number. The docket is the running court record for that same case — it is not an extra case.
A published opinion or ruling is a written court decision. One case can produce several opinions, so opinion counts and case counts answer different questions. Only trusted, reportable opinions are used in the outcome statistics on this page.
Docket entries are the individual filings inside a case — motions, orders, scheduling notices. We read them to confirm a case is real and to see where it got to, but an entry is never counted as a case or as an outcome. A single case can generate hundreds of entries.
Far fewer opinions than cases is normal. Many employment cases settle privately or close without a published opinion. No opinion here does not mean the worker lost; it means this public record does not show a reportable result.
Everything on this page comes from public federal court records. Where we are not confident a record is accurate, we leave it out rather than guess.
Federal court cases
public court recordsOne row per court+docket case · written opinions stay grouped inside their case · plaintiff names redacted
Other Transportation & Logistics employers
Browse trusted published opinions involving similar workplaces.
Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The presence of an employer on this page does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.